The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
On specifying the null model for incremental fit indices in structural equation modeling.
Open accessAbstract
In structural equation modeling, incremental fit indices are based on the comparison of the fit of a substantive model to that of a null model. The standard null model yields unconstrained estimates of the variance (and mean, if included) of each manifest variable. For many models, however, the standard null model is an improper comparison model. In these cases, incremental fit index values reported automatically by structural modeling software have no interpretation and should be disregarded. The authors explain how to formulate an acceptable, modified null model, predict changes in fit index values accompanying its use, provide examples illustrating effects on fit index values when using such a model, and discuss implications for theory and practice of structural equation modeling.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999) · Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1080/10705519909540118 · Cited by 108,788
Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992) · Sociological Methods & Research · doi:10.1177/0049124192021002005 · Cited by 27,200
Comparative fit indexes in structural models.
Bentler, P. M. (1990) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238 · Cited by 25,266
Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures.
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.88.3.588 · Cited by 19,023
Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1998) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.3.4.424 · Cited by 12,298
Measurement Invariance, Factor Analysis and Factorial Invariance
Meredith, W. (1993) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02294825 · Cited by 4,536
Simultaneous Factor Analysis in Several Populations
Jöreskog, K. G. (1971) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02291366 · Cited by 2,051
Cited by
Fredrickson, B. L., Cohn, M. A., Coffey, K. A., Pek, J., & Finkel, S. M. (2008) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0013262 · Cited by 2,365
“A multitude of factors may be associated with individual trajectories of change over time, therefore, it is rare for growth models or combined growth and path-analysis models to fit well when assessed using standard SEM fit indices, such as root-mean-square error of approximation ( Widaman & Thompson, 2003 ).”
Kiken, L. G., Garland, E. L., Bluth, K., Palsson, O. S., & Gaylord, S. A. (2015) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2014.12.044 · Cited by 717
Happiness in Everyday Life: The Uses of Experience Sampling
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Hunter, J. (2003) · Journal of Happiness Studies · doi:10.1023/a:1024409732742 · Cited by 717
The Problem with Having Two Watches: Assessment of Fit When RMSEA and CFI Disagree
Lai, K., & Green, S. B. (2016) · Multivariate Behavioral Research · doi:10.1080/00273171.2015.1134306 · Cited by 514
Lee, J., Kim, J., & Choi, J. Y. (2019) · Telematics and Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.tele.2018.12.006 · Cited by 382
Metadata
- Authors
- Widaman, K. F., & Thompson, J. S.
- Venue
- Psychological Methods
- Published
- 2003
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 16-37
- ISSN
- 1082-989X (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1463
- OpenAlex
- W2031028430
- Cited by
- 400
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 12.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: On specifying the null model for incremental fit indices in structural equation modeling. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/1082-989x.8.1.16
- The paper
- Widaman, K. F., & Thompson, J. S. (2003). On specifying the null model for incremental fit indices in structural equation modeling. Psychological Methods. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989x.8.1.16
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
